IPVM-BOOK-2013-1

VIDEO SURVEILLANCE BOOK 2013

January 3, 2012

© IPVM.com 2 of 95

Contents

Preface ........................................................................................................ 3 Designing a Video Surveillance Solution .................................................. 4 Resolution ................................................................................................ 16 Selecting Surveillance Cameras .............................................................. 22 Selecting Video Management Systems .................................................... 32 Challenges with Video Analytics ............................................................. 37 Selecting Video Analytics ........................................................................ 41 Bandwidth Basics for Video Surveillance ............................................... 46 Integrating 3

rd Party Systems / APIs ........................................................ 51

Surveillance's Shift to IP .......................................................................... 54 Statistics: What is Actually Being Used .................................................. 59 Top 10 Surveillance Myths Exposed ....................................................... 63 Surveillance Video in Action ................................................................... 74 Improving Real World Surveillance Video .............................................. 78 FBI CCTV Best Practices Reviewed ....................................................... 83

© IPVM.com 3 of 95

Preface

IPVM is the world's leading source of video surveillance information. We are a team

of engineers with deep surveillance expertise dedicated to providing the most

accurate and insightful information. We continuously conduct testing and research

that delivers unique insights.

This is the third edition of our book, 90% of which is new compared to the 2008

original version. This edition reflects thousands of hours of research and testing.

Use of this Book

You may use this book for your own personal education. However we retain copyright

and do not allow republishing, redistributing or selling this content.

Advanced Information

While this book teaches surveillance fundamentals, IPVM's website provides the

world's most comprehensive, timely and advanced information (over 2300 total

articles and 40+ new ones each month). Get full access as an IPVM PRO Member.

© IPVM.com 4 of 95

Designing a Video Surveillance Solution

Designing a video surveillance solution requires decisions on 8 fundamental

questions. This in-depth tutorial helps beginners understand the options and

tradeoffs involved in designing a solid surveillance solution.

The 8 fundamental questions are:

What type of cameras should I use?

How should I connect cameras to video management systems?

What type of video management system should I use?

What type of storage should I use?

How should I record video?

What type of video analytics should I use?

How should I view my surveillance video?

How should I integrate video with my other systems?

1. Cameras

Cameras are literally the eyes of a video surveillance system. Cameras should be

deployed in critical areas to capture relevant video.

The two basic principles of camera deployment are (1) use chokepoints and (2) cover

assets.

Chokepoints are areas where people or vehicles must pass to enter a certain area.

Examples include doorways, hallways and driveways. Placing cameras at chokepoints

© IPVM.com 5 of 95

is a very cost-effective way to document who entered a facility.

Assets are the specific objects or areas that need security. Examples of assets include

physical objects such as safes and merchandise areas as well as areas where

important activity occurs such as cash registers, parking spots or lobbies. What is

defined as an asset is relative to the needs and priorities of your organization.

Once you determine what areas you want to cover, there are 4 camera characteristics

to decide on:

Fixed vs. PTZ: A camera can be fixed to only look at one specific view or it can

be movable through the use of panning, tilting and zooming (i.e., moving left and

right, up and down, closer and farther away). Most cameras used in surveillance

are fixed. PTZ cameras are generally used to cover wider fields of views and should

generally be used only if you expect a monitor to actively use the cameras on a

daily basis. A key reason fixed cameras are generally used is that they cost 5 -8

times less than PTZs (fixed cameras average $300 - $600 USD whereas PTZ cameras

can be over $2,000 USD).

Panoramic vs. PTZs: One of the biggest emerging trends is replacing PTZs with

panoramic / 360 megapixel cameras. While panoramic cameras cannot match

the range potential of PTZs, they can record in all directions, a big advantage

over PTZs. Learn more in our Panoramic vs. PTZ tutorial.

Color vs. Infrared vs. Thermal: In TV, a video can be color or black and white.

In video surveillance today, the only time producing a black and white image

makes sense is when lighting is very low (e.g., night time). In those conditions,

infrared or thermal cameras produce black and white images. Infrared cameras

require special lamps (infrared illuminators) that produce clear image in the dark

© IPVM.com 6 of 95

(but are significantly more expensive than color cameras - often 2x to 3x more).

Thermal cameras require no lighting but produce only silhouettes of objects and

are very expensive ($5,000 - $20,000 on average). In day time or lighted areas,

color cameras are the obvious choice as the premium for color over black and

white is trivial.

Standard Definition vs. Megapixel: This choice is similar to that of TVs. Just

like in the consumer market, historically everyone used standard definition

cameras but now users are shifting into high definition cameras. While high

definition TV maxes out at 2 Megapixel, surveillance cameras can provide ten

megapixel or more. Now in 2012, megapixel is becoming the standard resolution

used in new projects. See a demonstration of megapixel cameras to learn more.

See our report contrasting SD vs. Megapixel cameras.

IP vs. Analog: The largest trend in video surveillance over the past few years is

the move from analog cameras to IP cameras. All surveillance cameras are

digitized to view and record on computers. However, IP cameras digitize the video

inside the camera while analog cameras require an encoder or DVR to digitize the

video. More importantly, IP supports megapixel while analog does not. This has

overwhelmingly shifted new system purchases to IP / megapixel.

Most organizations will mix and match a number of different camera types. For

instance, an organization may use infrared fixed cameras around a perimeter with a

PTZ overlooking the parking lot. On the inside, they may have a fixed megapixel

camera covering the warehouse and a number of fixed IP cameras covering the

entrance and hallways.

2. Connectivity

In professional video surveillance, cameras are almost always connected to video

© IPVM.com 7 of 95

management systems for the purpose of recording and managing access to video.

There are two main characteristics to decide on for connectivity.

IP vs. Analog: Video can be transmitted over your computer network (IP) or it

can be sent as native analog video. Today, most video feeds are sent using analog

but migration to IP transmission is rapidly occurring. Both IP cameras and analog

cameras can be transmitted over IP. IP cameras can connect directly to an IP

network (just like your PC). Analog cameras cannot directly connect to an IP

network. However, you can install an encoder to transmit analog feeds over IP. The

encoder has an input for an analog camera video feed and outputs a digital stream

for transmission over an IP network. Now, in 2012, for new professional projects,

the market has tipped to IP.

Wired vs. Wireless: Video can be sent over cables or through the air, whether

you are using IP or analog video. Over 90% of video is sent over cables as this is

generally the cheapest and most reliable way of sending video (see our wireless

stats report). However, wireless is an important option for transmitting video as

deploying wires can be cost-prohibitive for certain applications such as parking

lots, fence lines and remote buildings.

3. Video Management System

Video management systems are the hub of video surveillance solutions, accepting

video from cameras, storing the video and managing distribution of video to viewers.

There are 4 fundamental options in video management systems. Most organizations

choose 1 of the 4. However, companies may have multiple types when they transition

between one and another.

© IPVM.com 8 of 95

DVRs are purpose built computers that combine software, hardware and video

storage all in one. By definition, they only accept analog camera feeds. Almost all

DVRs today support remote viewing over the Internet. DVRs are very simple to

install but they significantly limit your flexibility in expansion and hardware

changes. DVRs are still today the most common option amongst professional

buyers. However, DVRs have definitely fallen out of favor and the trend is to move

to one of the 3 categories below.

HDVRs or hybrid DVRs are DVRs that support IP cameras. They have all the

functionality of a DVR listed above plus they add support for IP and megapixel

cameras. Most DVRs can be software upgraded to become HDVRs. Such upgrades

are certainly a significant trend and is attractive because of the low migration cost

(supports analog and IP cameras directly). Learn more about the value and

issues in selecting HDVRS.

NVRs are like DVRs in all ways except for camera support. Whereas a DVR only

supports analog cameras, an NVR only supports IP cameras. To support analog

cameras with an NVR, an encoder must be used.

Video Management Software (VMS) is a software application, like Word or

Excel. Unlike DVRs or NVRs, VMS Software does not come with any hardware or

storage. The user must load and set up the PC/Server for the software. This

provides much greater freedom and potentially lower cost than using DVR/NVR

appliances. However, it comes with more complexity and time to set up and

optimize the system. Overall, though, VMS software is becoming the most

commonly used recording approach in new deployments.

4. Storage

© IPVM.com 9 of 95

Surveillance video is almost always stored for later retrieval and review. The average

storage duration is around 30 days. However, a small percentage of organization store

video for much shorter (7 days) or for much longer (some for a few years).

The two most important drivers for determining storage duration is the cost of

storage and the security threats an organization faces.

While storage is always getting cheaper, video surveillance demands huge amount of

storage. For comparison, Google's email service offer about 7 GB of free email

storage. This is considered to be an enormous amount for email. However, a single

camera could consume that much storage in a day. It is fairly common for video

surveillance systems to require multiple TBs of storage even with only a few dozen

cameras. Because storage is such a significant cost, numerous techniques exist to

optimize the use of storage.

The type of security threats also impact determining storage duration. For instance, a

major threat at banks is the report of fraudulent investigations. These incidents are

often not reported by affected customers until 60 or 90 days after the incident. As

such, banks have great need for longer term storage. By contrast, casinos usually

know about issues right away and if a problem is to arise they learn about it in the

same week. Casinos then, very frequently, use much shorter storage duration (a few

weeks is common).

Four fundamental types of storage may be selected:

Internal storage uses hard drives built inside of a DVR, NVR or server. Today

© IPVM.com 10 of 95

this is still the most common form of storage. With hard drives of up to 2 TB

common today, internal storage generally provides total storage of 4TB to 8TB.

Internal storage is the cheapest option but tends to be less scalable than the other

options.

Directly Attached storage is when hard drives are located outside of the DVR,

NVR or server but are 'directly' connected without having to use an IP network.

Examples of this include USB and eSATA. This is an inexpensive way to add

dedicated storage to a single 'box' typically at low cost and with a simple setup.

Networked Storage, such as NAS or SAN, are IP based 'pools' of storage

specialized in storing video from large numbers of cameras. Multiple DVRs, NVRs

or servers can stream video to these storage clusters. They provide efficient,

flexible and scalable storage for very large camera counts but at higher cost and

complexity.

Onboard Camera allows embedding storage inside the camera itself typically

by way of SD card and rarely hard drives. With this approach, the camera can

record locally, reducing network use and dependence. Of the 4 types, this is the

least commonly used but likely the most interesting for future potential.

The clear majority of surveillance projects still prefer using internal or direct attached

storage. However, networked storage is gaining in popularity. See our report on

surveillance storage preferences for more.

Storage Redundancy: A second, yet still important aspect is whether your surveillance

storage has redundancy, specifically how capable it is to survive a hard drive crash. In

the old days, this was rare. However, this is now becoming more and more common.

See our report on storage redundancy / RAID use.

© IPVM.com 11 of 95

5. Recording Video

Users face 3 important choices in how they record video:

What resolution do you record at?

Do you record continuously or based on motion?

What frame rate do you record at?

Recording resolution is limited to what the camera can capture. If you buy a Standard

Definition camera, you can never record it at High Definition resolution. On the

flipside, typically users record at the highest resolution the camera can capture.

One of the toughest choices is to record continuously or based on motion. They both

have tradeoffs. Continuous ensures video is always recorded but wastes storage

space. Motion based saves significantly on storage but increase the risk that

important video will be risked. Overall, most systems use motion based today. See our

recording mode statistics report.

Finally, when setting up recording, frame rate selection is important. You can go low

and use 1fps and have a slide show or high and use 30fps like TV. Our statistics on

frame rate usage shows that 6-10 fps is most common. See our frame rate recording

statistics report.

6. Video Analytics

Video analytics scan incoming video feeds to (1) optimize storage or (2) to identify

threatening/interesting events.

© IPVM.com 12 of 95

Storage optimization is the most commonly used application of video analytics. In its

simplest form, video analytics examines video feeds to identify changes in motion.

Based on the presence or absence of motion, the video management system can

decide not to store video or store video at a lower frame rate or resolution. Because

surveillance video captures long periods of inactivity (like hallways and staircases,

buildings when they are closed, etc.), using motion analytics can reduce storage

consumption by 60% - 80% relative to continuously recording.

Using video analytics to identify threatening/interesting events is the more 'exciting'

form of video analytics. Indeed, generally when industry people talk of video

analytics, this is their intended reference. Common examples of this are perimeter

violation, abandoned object, people counting and license plate recognition. The goal

of these types of video analytics is to pro-actively identify security incidents and to

stop them in progress (e.g., perimeter violation spots a thief jumping your fence so

that you can stop them in real time, license plate recognition identifies a vehicle

belonging to a wanted criminal so you can apprehend him).

These video analytics have been generally viewed as a disappointment. While many

observers believe that video analytics will improve, the video analytics market is

currently contracting (in response to its issues and the recession). Learn more about

the challenges in using video analytics.

7. Viewing Video

Surveillance video is ultimately viewed by human beings. Most surveillance video is

never viewed. Of the video that is viewed, the most common use is for historical

© IPVM.com 13 of 95

investigations. Some surveillance video is viewed live continuously, generally in

retail (to spot shoplifters) and in public surveillance (to identify criminal threats.

Most live video surveillance is done periodically in response to a 'called-in' threat or

to check up on the status of a remote facility.

4 fundamental options exist for viewing video:

Local Viewing directly from the DVR, NVR or servers is ideal for monitoring

small facilities on site. This lets the video management system double as a

viewing station, saving you the cost of setting up or using a PC. This approach is

most common in retailers, banks and small businesses.

Remote PC Viewing is the most common way of viewing surveillance video. In

this approach, standard PCs are used to view live and recorded video. Either a

proprietary application is installed on the PC or a web browser is used. Most

remote PC viewing is done with an installed application as it provides the greatest

functionality. However, as web applications mature, more providers are offering

powerful web viewing. The advantage of watching surveillance video using a web

browser is that you do not have to install nor worry about upgrading a client.

Mobile Viewing allows security operators in the field to immediately check

surveillance video. As responders and roving guards are common in security,

mobile viewing has great potential. Though mobile clients have been available for

many years, implementation challenges with early PDAs/phones restricted use.

Now, renewed interest and optimism is emerging with the strong smartphone

growth such as iPhone, iPad and Android.

Video Wall Viewing is ideal for large security operation centers that have

hundreds or thousands of cameras under their jurisdiction. Video walls provide

very large screens so that a group of people can simultaneously watch. This is

© IPVM.com 14 of 95

especially critical when dealing with emergencies. Video walls generally have

abilities to switch between feeds and to automatically display feeds from locations

where alarms have been triggered.

8. Integrating Video with Other Systems

Many organizations use surveillance video by itself, simply pulling up the video

management systems' client application to watch applications. However, for larger

organizations and those with more significant security concerns, this is an inefficient

and poor manner to perform security operations. Instead, these organizations prefer

an approach similar to the military's common operational picture (COP) where

numerous security systems all display on a singular interface. Three ways exist to

deliver such integration with video surveillance:

Access Control as Hub: Most organizations have electronic/IP access control

systems. These systems have been designed for many years to integrate with other

security systems such as intrusion detection and video surveillance. This is the

most way to integrate video surveillance and relatively inexpensive ($10,000 -

$50,000 USD). However, access control systems are often limited in the number

and depth of integration they support.

PSIM as Hub: In the last few years, manufacturers now provide specialized

applications whose sole purpose is aggregating information from security systems

(like video surveillance) and provide the most relevant information and optimal

response policies. These applications tend to be far more expensive ($100,000 -

$1,000,000 USD) yet support a far wider range of security manufacturers and offer

more sophisticated features.

Video Management System as Hub: Increasingly, video management systems

© IPVM.com 15 of 95

are adding in support for other security systems and security management

features. If you only need limited integration, your existing video management

system may provide an inexpensive (yet limited) solution.

Learn more about options for integrating video with other systems.

Evaluating Specific Products - The Next Step

If you feel comfortable with the key decisions to be made, you may want to start

examining what companies provide the best products for your need. You can learn

more specific companies by reading the IPVM Buyer's Guide.

© IPVM.com 16 of 95

Resolution

Understanding video surveillance resolution is surprisingly difficult and complex.

While the word 'resolution' seems self-explanatory, its use in surveillance is far from

it. In this tutorial, we will explain 4 critical elements:

What resolution traditionally means – seeing details - and the constraints of this

approach

What resolution usually means in surveillance – pixels – and the limits of using this

metric

How sensor and stream resolutions may vary

How compression impacts resolution greatly

Resolution – Seeing Details

In normal English and general usage, resolution means the ability to resolve details –

to see or make them out. For example, can you read the lowest line on an eye chart?

Can the camera clearly display multiple lines side by side on a monitor? etc. It is a

performance metric focusing on results.

Historically, video surveillance used this approach. Analog camera resolution was

measured with line counts, literally the camera's ability to display more lines side by

side in a given area on a monitor.

© IPVM.com 17 of 95

If you could see more lines, it meant you could see more real world details – facial

features, characters, license plates, etc.

The main limitation was that resolving power – lines counted – was always done in

perfectly even lighting conditions. However, with direct sunlight or low light, the

resolving power would change, likely falling significantly. Even more challenging,

some cameras fared far worse in these challenging lighting conditions than others.

While this approaches measures performance, it only does so in the most ideal, and

often unrepresentative, conditions.

Resolution – Pixel Count

Now, with the shift to IP, manufacturers do not even attempt to measure

performance. Instead, resolution has been redefined as counting the number of

physical pixels that an image sensor has.

© IPVM.com 18 of 95

The presumption is that more pixels, much like higher line counts, delivers higher

‘quality’. However, this is far from certain.

Just like with classic resolution measurements that used only ideal lighting conditions,

measuring pixels alone ignores the impact of common real world surveillance lighting

challenges. Often, but not always, having many more pixels can result in poorer

resolving power in low light conditions. Plus, cameras with lower pixel counts but

superior image processing can deliver higher quality images in bright sunlight / WDR

scenes.

Nonetheless, pixels have become a cornerstone of specifying IP video surveillance.

Despite its limitations, you should:

Recognize that when a surveillance professional is talking about resolution, they

are almost certainly referring to pixel count, not resolving power

Understand the different resolution options available

The table below summarizes the most common resolutions used in production video

surveillance deployments today:

© IPVM.com 19 of 95

Everything else equal, you should expect to pay more for higher resolution (i.e. pixel

count) cameras. While these cameras can often deliver more details, keep in mind

performance variances (low light, WDR).

Resolution – Sensor vs. Stream

While manufacturers typically specify cameras based on the resolution (i.e. pixel

count) of the sensor, sometimes, the resolution of the stream sent can be less. This

happens in 2 cases:

The manufacturer uses a higher resolution sensor than maximum stream they

support. One common example of this is panoramic cameras where a 5MP sensor

may be used but only a 2MP max output stream.

The integrator explicitly or mistakenly sets a camera to a lower resolution. Some

times this is done to save bandwidth but other times it is simply an error or glitch

in the VMS default resolution configuration. Either way, many times an HD

resolution may look ‘terrible’ but the issue is simply that it is not set to its max

stream resolution (i.e., a 3MP camera set to 640 x 480).

Make sure to check not only the resolution of the sensor but the stream resolutions

supported and used.

© IPVM.com 20 of 95

Don’t Forget Compression

One other important issue – since resolution now measures physical pixels, it does

not consider how much the pixel data is compressed. Each pixel is assigned a value to

represent its color, typically out of a range of ~16 million (24 bits), creating a huge

amount of data. For instance, a 1080p/30fps uncompressed stream is over 1Gb/s.

However, with digital video today, surveillance video is almost always compressed.

That 1080p/30fps stream would more typically be recorded at 1Mb/s to 8Mb/s –

1/100th to 1/1000th less than the uncompressed stream. The only question – and it is

a huge one – is how much does video get compressed?

The positive side is the potential to massively reduce bandwidth/storage without

significantly impacting visible image quality. That is why it is nearly universally done.

However, picking the right compression level can be tricky. How much compression

loss can be tolerated often depends on subjective preferences of viewers or the

details of the scene being captured. Equally important, increasing compression can

result in great cost saving on hard drive, switch and server reductions.

Just because two cameras have the same resolution (i.e. pixel counts), the visible

image quality could vary substantially because of differences in compression levels

chosen. Read our video quality / compression tutorial to dig into these details.

Factors Impacting Resolution

Unfortunately, many factors impact surveillance resolution, far beyond pixels, such

© IPVM.com 21 of 95

as:

Low light performance

WDR performance

Compression settings

Lens selection and focus

Do not accept specified resolution (i.e. pixel count) as the one and only quality metric

as it will result in great problems. Understand and factor in all of these drivers to

obtain the highest quality for your applications.

© IPVM.com 22 of 95

Selecting Surveillance Cameras

When selecting a camera, you can choose from a number of different form factors

and options. Each form factor comes with its own unique strengths and weaknesses -

both in terms of physical sizing and advanced features provided. In this chapter, we

examine each form factor, providing recommendations on when to use each type.

At a high level, 5 form factor categories exist:

Cube

Bullet

Box

Dome

PTZ

Cube Cameras

Cube cameras are generally the least expensive cameras and, as such, are often

deployed in residential or small business applications. A few IP cube cameras have an

online price under $100 and the majority are under $250.

Here's a sample of what a cube camera looks like:

When considering cube cameras, a number of important limitations should be

© IPVM.com 23 of 95

considered:

Fixed focal lenses: If you want to adjust the Field of View of a cube camera, you

will have to physically move the camera to accommodate

Not Day/Night: Of the 46 cube cameras in our Camera Finder, none of them

have a mechanical cut filter, ensuring poor low light / night time quality

Rare IR support: Only a few cube cameras in our Camera Finder have integrated

IR LEDs to enhance low light / night time imaging

WDR / Bright light issues: In our ongoing tests, cube cameras generally have

moderate to severe problems in dealing with backlight or lighting variances

Lack of PoE support: Less than 25% of cube cameras have PoE support

Indoor only: only 3 of the 46 cube cameras we track are rated for outdoor use

and those are only IP54 rated against dust and water splashing

Short Warranties: More than 70% of cube cameras have a 1 year warranty

while other form factors regularly have 2 or 3 year warranties

On the other hand, some cube cameras offer more advanced features:

Over 50% of cube cameras in our Camera Finder have integrated wireless

networking; while this usually works only over short distances, it can be helpful to

eliminate network cabling. Also note that wireless support is much more common

in cube cameras than any other form factor.

Higher Frame Rate: More than 70% of cube cameras offer 15fps or higher

which is generally more than enough for most applications

About 25% of cube cameras support 720p or 1.3MP

Finally, cube cameras are generally small providing a low profile (especially compared

to box cameras). However, if aesthetics and concealment are a priority, domes

© IPVM.com 24 of 95

provide the best option.

We've tested a number of cube cameras. For more, read/watch our reviews on

Cisco/Linksys, D-Link, Lorex, Panasonic and TrendNet cube cameras.

Box vs. Dome Cameras

Most of the time, deciding on fixed cameras comes down to a decision of box vs.

dome. Indeed, about 90% of fixed cameras made and used are box or dome. By

contrast cube and bullets are 'specialist' form factors.

Here is a physical overview of box vs. dome:

We are going to compare the tradeoffs between using box and dome form factors.

The chart below provides an overview of the tradeoffs:

Criteria Box Dome

Interchangeable Lens Very Common Uncommon

Aiming Flexibility Easy Can be Limited

© IPVM.com 25 of 95

Price Slightly Cheaper Slightly Costlier

Install Time Easier Indoors Easier Outdoors

Cutting Edge Features Sometimes More

Aesthetics / Concealment Weaker Stronger

Vandal Resistant Rare Common

Outdoor Ready Needs Enclosure Often Built-in

Integrated IR Rare Often

Box Cameras

Box cameras provide flexibility and simplicity at a relatively low price. Let's examine

the main reasons that users choose box cameras:

Interchangeable Lenses: About 90% of box cameras allow users to easily

change lenses. This is important especially if you are trying to view something that

is far away (and will require a telephoto lens). By contrast, less than 33% of dome

cameras support interchangeable lenses and those that do usually have size

constraints because of the tighter physical enclosure.

Aiming Camera: If you need to aim a camera in any angle rather than straight

ahead, box cameras tend to be easier and provide greater range than dome

cameras. With dome cameras, because they are enclosed within a housing,

movement can be restricted (though this varies depending on the design of the

dome).

Lower price: Box cameras generally have a lower price, all things being equal,

compared to domes. For instance, the average SD box camera, without analytics,

costs ~$550. By contrast, the average SD dome camera, without analytics, costs

© IPVM.com 26 of 95

~$625.

Less Time to Install: Because dome cameras are often attached by a short

mount to a ceiling, they often can be set up quicker and with less skill. While

providing superior aesthetics, domes can be more complicated to install.

More Cutting Edge Features: When features are new, they tend to appear first

in box cameras rather than domes. For instance, the highest resolution cameras

continue to be in boxes rather than domes. Also, more box cameras have built in

advanced video analytics than domes.

These noted, domes offer a broad array of advantages over box cameras.

Dome Cameras

While domes can be slightly more expensive, they offer a number of physical

options/advantages that are rare with box cameras.

Aesthetics/concealment: Domes can mount flush against a ceiling or wall,

making them relatively inconspicuous. That noted, dome sizes vary significantly

from mini domes to big bulky domes. Mini domes offer the best

aesthetic/concealment abilities.

Vandal Resistant: Over 60% of domes are vandal resistant compared to less

than 10% of box cameras. If you are concerned about people damaging your

camera, vandal resistant is valuable. Note though that the amount or level of

vandal resistance of a particular camera can vary dramatically. While official vandal

metrics exist (called IK ratings), manufacturers rarely disclose if or what results

their cameras achieved.

Outdoor: If you want a camera that can be mounted outdoors without adding a

separate housing, domes are preferable. More than half of dome cameras are

© IPVM.com 27 of 95

outdoor rated while less than 15% of box cameras are outdoor rated.

Integrated IR: If you want to improve low light / night time performance, some

domes provided integrated (built-in) IR LEDs. This is a low cost way of improving

video quality when artificial lighting is not available. On the other hand, the

distance achievable can be short (less than 20 meters / 60 feet) and the presence

of IR LEDs so close to the imager can cause image problems.

Let's say you want vandal resistant, outdoor cameras with integrated IR but prefer the

box form factor for its ease of aiming and ability to interchange lenses.

Bullet Cameras

Bullet cameras can be best thought of as a specialist form of box camera. Bullets

usually add a few features/benefits uncommon in box cameras. Let's examine the

common patterns in the 20+ bullet cameras we track:

Over 75% are IP66 or IP67 rated: This makes bullets easier to deploy outdoors

as there is no need to buy and install a separate enclosure.

Over 80% support true/day night: This makes bullets good outdoors in low light

situations.

Over 80% of bullets have integrated IR illuminators: This makes bullets good

when there is no light and you need to see short distances (usually 50 feet / 15

meters or less).

Below is an example of a bullet camera. Notice both the outdoor housing and the

built-in IR LEDs around the lens

© IPVM.com 28 of 95

PTZ Cameras

When considering PTZs, the most basic decision is: PTZ or fixed camera. Can you

justify paying significantly more to get the benefits of a camera that you can control

across a wide area (i.e., a PTZ)?

We have 2 fundamental reports that examine the key issues in selecting PTZs. We

recommend you read these first before selecting PTZs:

Training- PTZ Surveillance Basics: includes video clips that show PTZs in action,

explaining the relative tradeoffs

Should You Use PTZ Cameras?: an examination of the advantages and

disadvantages of PTZs compared to fixed and megapixel cameras

PTZ Options

When selecting PTZs, 3 elements most uniquely impact pricing and performance:

Optical Zoom: Choosing optical zoom is important when you need to see things

that are far away. In practice, Optical zoom ranges from about 3x to 36x (with a

few PTZs with lower and higher zooms). While it's generally believed that the

longer the optical zoom, the farther the PTZ can 'see', this is not always correct.

© IPVM.com 29 of 95

The optical zoom measures the range of focus. For instance, if a PTZ has a 20x

optical zoom, it means that there is a 20 times difference between the camera's

widest and narrowest focal length (e.g., 4 mm to 80 mm). However, another

camera with a 20x optical zoom can have a focal length range from 3.3 mm to 66

mm. Assuming the first PTZ has the same size imager, that PTZ will be able to see

'farther'. In general, a higher optical zoom number means a camera will see farther

but not always. Secondly, the difference between an 18x optical zoom and 36x

optical zoom does not mean you can see 18x as far. Assuming the cameras have

the same minimum focal length (e.g., the 18x PTZ has a range - for example - of 3.5

mm to 63mm and the 36x PTZ has a range of 3.5mm to 126 mm), the 36x PTZ may

'see' twice as far (at most).

Pan Range: Pan range measures the freedom the PTZ has to move horizontally.

The maximum range is 360 degrees, meaning that the PTZ can move horizontally

continuously to 'look' in any direction. About 60% of PTZs support 360 degree

panning. If you plan to have a PTZ in the middle of an area and dedicate operators

to track suspects, you should strongly consider a PTZ with 360 degrees panning.

This will cost, on average, a few hundred dollars more but will help ensure that

you do not lose suspects due to constraints on panning the PTZ.

Tilt Range: Tilt range measures movement vertically (looking up and down).

The 'magic number' for tilt range is 180 degrees. This means the camera can look

all the way from one side to the other (e.g., look to the right, look all the way

down, look to the left). This is important, just like with 360 panning, to make sure

you can track a suspect across a facility. However, only about 30% of PTZs can do

180 degrees or more (fyi - the maximum tilt range in our finder is 220 degrees).

Not surprisingly, these cameras are more expensive - expect to pay about $150 -

$300 more for this feature.

© IPVM.com 30 of 95

PTZ Pricing and Cost Tradeoffs

Central to the PTZ decision is price tradeoffs. PTZ pricing ranges significantly (by 10x)

and can be much more expensive than fixed cameras (often by 3x). While PTZs add an

important element, the extreme increase in price requires careful consideration.

Let's review key pricing tradeoffs:

Compared to fixed box cameras, PTZ cameras are about 2 to 3 times as

expensive. For instance, a box SD camera has an average cost of about $600 while

an SD PTZ camera has an average cost of about $1500. This is somewhat offset by

fixed cameras often not providing a lens and not being outdoor ready. As such,

the actual price increase can vary. However, for similar feature sets/resolution,

expect to pay at least 2 times the price for a PTZ (over a fixed camera).

Compared to a 5MP camera, indoor SD PTZ cameras are about the same price

while outdoor PTZ cameras are significantly cheaper. For instance, an average 5MP

box camera costs about $1200 - roughly the same as an indoor SD PTZ. However, a

5MP box camera is about $600-$700 less than an outdoor SD PTZ camera.

Really basic PTZs can be quite cheap. For instance, over 25 PTZs cost less than

$750. However, the average pan range is about 180 degrees and the average tilt

range is about 90 degrees. The average optical zoom range is 2-3x. This

significantly limits where and how far the PTZ can look.

Outdoor PTZ are far more expensive than indoors PTZs: on average, about

$900. This is partially a consequence of having longer optical zooms

(manufacturers reasonably assume that PTZs outdoors will need to see farther).

For further details on specifying the right IP camera, review our Surveillance Camera

© IPVM.com 31 of 95

RFP Template.

© IPVM.com 32 of 95

Selecting Video Management Systems

Selecting the right VMS system can be surprisingly difficult. On the one hand, all

systems let you monitor, record and playback video. As such, it is easy to get the

basics. On the other hand, you can only choose one VMS system for your entire

deployment so you are forced to make tough compromises. In this chapter, we

examine these challenges.

Background and Training

While this chapter will explain key differentiators, it does not teach the basics about

VMS systems. See our 2 hours of online training covering the fundamentals of VMS

systems.

There Can Only Be One

VMS systems typically require a single selection. Rarely, do users pick multiple VMS

systems. Typically this is only done when transitioning from an old system to a new

one. You almost never see a user with one VMS system managing outdoor cameras,

another one managing indoor cameras, etc. The prime driver against this is

complexity in monitoring. For good reason, most users want a single interface to

quickly access all of their cameras. They do not want to switch browsers or

applications to view different cameras. [Advanced users will note that PSIM is an

option to resolve this but it is a very costly one that 99% of users reject.]

Selecting a VMS then introduces unique challenges compared to selecting cameras.

With a camera, you can choose the right one for each specific area. For example, for a

fence line, an integrated IR bullet from manufacturer A and, for a conference room, a

© IPVM.com 33 of 95

multimegapixel minidome from manufacturer B. With VMS systems, you do not have

that flexibility. Even if one VMS system has better feature sets for outdoor areas and

another for indoor ones, you would not mix and match VMS systems.

Inevitably, even the best VMS system for a user will come with numerous deficiencies

relative to other offerings. Professional VMS systems have hundreds of features and

numerous variances in how they implement functionalities. Since a single VMS system

will typically cover all your cameras and all your users, you will almost always have

reasonable disagreements about which is best. This simply needs to be accepted as a

fact of life.

General Differentiation - By Size

While some give up and say that all VMS systems are basically the same, we have

found that the most meaningful differentiation occurs by size of system to be

managed, specifically:

Small Systems - typically systems with 16 cameras or less have common needs

that are distinct from larger systems. The number of features needed are low

while the importance of simplicity is high. Finally, price is key here. In 2012, you

typically find the best matches from VMS providers who charge $50 or less per

camera licensed.

Mid-Size Systems - systems that are between 16 and 64 cameras typically have

more demands than small systems but do not need all the advanced features of

true enterprise offerings. In 2012, you would expect to pay between $100 and

$150 per camera licenses for such VMS systems.

Large Scale Systems - systems with hundreds of cameras generally have

demands unique from 'regular' systems. While these systems only reflect a small

percentage of overall users, the needs here are much more sophisticated. Here

© IPVM.com 34 of 95

one would expect to pay $250+ per camera license. In the next section, we will

examine the key differentiators in these offerings.

Advanced Differentiators

For large scale systems, we have found a number of feature sets that are not

commonly available across VMS providers. These serve as the major differentiators in

choosing more costly and advanced VMS systems.

Enterprise Management

Only advanced VMS versions offer way to manage hundreds of cameras and multiple

servers in a single interface efficiently. Examples include providing centralized account

management and allowing configuration and live monitoring across multiple servers.

This eliminates switching between different monitors, updating passwords manually

for multiple servers while enabling batch updates to configurations of multiple

cameras. The inclusion and sophistication of enterprise management is one of the

most important differentiators for larger systems.

3rd Party System Support

Integrating with 3rd party systems such as access control, PSIM, PoS systems and video

keyboards/matrixes is one of the most important differentiators. While anyone can

claim to do so, actually completing it is a big advantage. This is especially important

given how fragmented the market is. If you want to integrate an existing system, make

sure to check immediately if the VMS under consideration has full, production

support for it.

3rd Party IP Camera Support

© IPVM.com 35 of 95

Supporting a variety of IP cameras is a moderate differentiator but not as important

as it used to be. With ONVIF gaining widespread support, it is getting fairly easy to

have at least basic integration with a wide variety of cameras. However, deeper

integration with cameras is still a differentiator. Some VMSes can access and utilize

more features of 3rd party cameras than others.

Alarm/Event Management

Advanced VMS users often want to manage and response to events and alarms

directly from the VMS client. Some basic VMS systems do not support this at all.

Others will vary significantly on the advanced options to manage including prioritizing

alerts, forwarding alerts, acknowledging alerts and reviewing response procedures for

alerts.

Analytics

Since analytics adoption has been disappointing, many VMS systems have weak

support for analytic providers. Even worse, dozens of small analytic companies exist

around the world. The combination means that if you want analytics, you need to be

careful if a VMS system supports the specific provider. The most important issue is

how the VMS system handles and displays alarms and information from the analytic

source. Often, this is limited or non-existent (i.e. video display only).

Redundancy

Typically, VMS software has no redundancy built in. If the VMS software crashes or

the PC/server it is running on goes offline, video recording and monitoring ceases. A

minority of VMS systems offer redundancy for recording and managing video even if

case of such problems.

© IPVM.com 36 of 95

Network Video Distribution

Larger operations will want to dynamically share video from a VMS system. For

example, a command center with a team of guards / investigators may want to look at

the same video at the same time and 'push' specific video feeds to other team

members. This is rarely supported only by the highest end VMS offerings.

Mobile Video Distribution

Viewing video and sending video from mobile phones is an emerging trend. Now,

almost every VMS system supports viewing video from a mobile phone. However, you

should check if your phone of choice (Apple, Android, Microsoft, Blackberry, etc.) is

supported as VMS vendors typically do not support all. Additionally, some VMS

vendors are starting to offer integration of video from phones to the VMS system that

turns smartphones into surveillance cameras.

© IPVM.com 37 of 95

Challenges with Video Analytics

From 2008 to 2012, many advances have occurred in surveillance. Video analytics has

not been one of them. This chapter below is from our original book but unfortunately

the concerns it raises are as still relevant today as they were in 2008. Indeed, one

major new challenge that has arisen is a patent troll attacking the video analytics

industry.

While video analytics holds great promise, people ask about the viability of using

analytics in the real world. Indeed, as stories of video analytic problems have spread,

concerns about the risks of video analytics now seem higher than a few years ago

when the novelty of the technology spurred wide excitement.

This article surveys the main problems limiting the use and growth of video analytics.

It is meant to help security managers and integrators gain a better sense of the core

issues involved.

Top 3 Problems:

Eliminating False Alerts

System Maintenance Too Difficult

Cost of System Too High

Eliminating False Alerts

Since the goal of video analytics is to eliminate human involvement, eliminating false

alerts is necessary to accomplish this. Each false alerts not only requires a human

© IPVM.com 38 of 95

assessment, it increases emotional and organizational frustration with the system.

Most are familiar with burglar alarm false alarms and the frustration these causes. On

average, burglar alarm false rate per house or business are fairly rare. If you have 1 or

2 per month, that is fairly high. Many people do not experience false alarms of their

burglar system for months.

By contrast, many video analytic systems can generate dozens of false alarms per day.

This creates a far greater issue than anything one is accustomed to with burglar

alarms. Plus, with such alarms happening many times throughout the day, it can

become an operational burden.

Now, not all video analytics systems generate lots of false alarms but many do. These

issues have been the number one issue limitation of the integrators and end-users

that I know using and trying video analytics.

System Maintenance Too Difficult

System maintenance is an often overlooked and somewhat hidden issue in video

analytics.

Over a period of weeks or months, a video analytic system's false alerts can start

rising considerably due to changes in the environment, weather and the position of

the sun. This can suddenly and surprisingly cause major problems with the system.

Not only is the increase in false alerts a problem, the risk now that the system could

unexpectedly break in the future creates a significant problem in trust. If your

perimeter surveillance one day stops functioning properly, you now have a serious

flaw in your overall security plan.

© IPVM.com 39 of 95

This has been a cause of a number of video analytic system failures. The systems,

already purchased, simply get put to the side becoming a very expensive testament to

not buying or referring one's colleagues to video analytics.

This being said, not all video analytic systems exhibit this behavior but you would be

prudent to carefully check references to verify that existing systems have been

operating for a long period of time without any major degradation.

Cost of System Too High

While you can find inexpensive video analytic systems today, these system tend to

exhibit problems 1 and 2, high false alerts and poor system maintenance. Indeed,

video analytic systems that are either free or only cost $100-$200 more generally

have significant operational problems.

One common feature of systems that work is that the complete price for hardware

and software is usually $500 or more per channel for the analytics. Now just because

a video analytic system is expensive obviously does not mean it is good. However,

there are necessary costs in building a system that is robust and works well in the real

world.

The cost of video analytic systems comes in making them robust to real world

conditions that we all take for granted. The developer needs to make the video

analytic system “intelligent” enough to handle differences in lighting, depth, position

of the sun, weather, etc. Doing this involves building more complex or sophisticated

programs. Such programs almost always require significantly more computing

hardware to execute and significant more capital investment in writing, testing and

© IPVM.com 40 of 95

optimizing the program. All of these clearly increase costs.

The challenge is that it is basically impossible to see this from marketing

demonstrations because from a demo all systems invariably look exactly alike. This of

course has the vicious effect of encouraging people to choose cheaper systems that

are more likely to generate high false alerts and be unmanageable.

If you select a system that works, the cost per camera can make it difficult to justify

the expense. Indeed, so much of the first generation video analytic deployments,

came from government grant money, essentially making the cost secondary or not

relevant. Nevertheless, for video analytics to grow in the private sector, they will not

only need to work they will need to generate financial return.

When video analytics allow for guard reduction or reduce high value frequent losses,

it is easy to justify and you see companies having success here. For other cases, where

humans are not being eliminated, the individual loss is small or the occurrence of loss

is low, the cost can be a major barrier.

Conclusion

Though video analytics successes will increase, such success will be constrained to

applications where the loss characteristics and/or the human reduction costs are

high. While analytics will certainly become cheaper, such cost decreases will take time

and in the interim, it is these high value applications where analytics can gain a

foothold of success.

© IPVM.com 41 of 95

Selecting Video Analytics

Video analytics may be implemented in a number of fundamentally different ways.

Each has important tradeoffs. Moreover, in our experience, some are far more likely

to be accurate as well as simpler to deploy. Below, we rank and analyze four

fundamental approaches: server based analytics, embedded DVR/NVR/VMS analytics,

add on camera analytics and embedded camera analytics.

Let's start with a review of each approach:

Server Based Analytics

What is it? Analytics software is loaded on a PC/server that is separate from the

recorder/VMS being used. Video is streamed in to the server and events/alarms are

displayed on the software's client or sent back to a VMS or PSIM client.

What is good about it?

Server side analytics do not depend on the resources available inside cameras

and recorders (which is often limited).

Developers can easily add this to an existing system regardless of the cameras

or recorders support of analytics.

What is bad about it?

Requires adding another piece of hardware.

Costly: Because this requires a new vendor and new hardware is added, this

tends to be the most costly approach.

© IPVM.com 42 of 95

Accuracy issues: Because the analytic software does not know the quality or

characteristics of the cameras streaming, it cannot optimize performance for

camera specific issues.

Complexity: Because a new server needs to be set and integration with a VMS

or PSIM needs to be added, this can be quite time consuming to set up.

What companies are examples of this? IBM, Cernium, BRS Labs, Iomniscient.

Embedded DVR/VMS Analytics

What is it? Analytics software is pre-loaded on a DVR or NVR appliance or within VMS

software. Administrators simply license and/or turn on analytics for their desired

channel.

What is good about it?

Simple setup: No servers to setup, no additional software to install and no need

to integrate with separate recorder

Integrated display: Because the analytics are part of the recorder solution,

typically the recorder's client software nicely integrates alarms, events and/or

searching inside.

What is bad about it?

Accuracy issues: Because the analytic software does not know the quality or

characteristics of the cameras streaming, it cannot optimize its performance for

camera specific issues.

Using with IP cameras: Heavy processing overhead if used with H.264 streams

which significantly limited number of total cameras used.

© IPVM.com 43 of 95

Performance constraints: Especially if run on DVR/NVR appliances, the analytics

may have significant restrictions in total performance or cameras supported.

Restricts VMS choice: Typically, users pick VMSes or recorders for numerous

reasons and usually have a platform in place. Difficult to switch just to get

analytics.

What companies are examples of this? Aimetis, 3VR, Clickit.

Add on Camera Analytics

What is it? Analytics software is loaded onto an IP camera. Video is analyzed within

the camera and events/alarms are sent to VMS systems for display / monitoring.

What is good about it?

Flexibility to pick and choose which cameras one wants to run analytics on.

Freedom to choose one's preferred camera manufacturer rather than being

locked into a specific camera vendor.

What is bad about it?

Only a handful of manufacturers currently support this, most notably Axis,

secondarily IQinVision.

Analytics are typically not optimized for the specific camera model.

Must ensure that the analytic output can be integrated with one's VMS

Note: people often talk about bandwidth savings being a benefit. We disagree. While

it may save bandwidth, this is generally not a key benefit. The reality is almost all

users stream all of their cameras anyway so streaming for cameras using video

© IPVM.com 44 of 95

analytics does not make a big difference.

What companies are examples of this? Agent Vi, Via-sys, Axis ACAP, IQinVision,

Object Video / Cisco

Embedded Camera Analytics

What is it? A manufacturer develops and manufactures a camera with their own

embedded video analytics.

What is good about it?

Performance: Manufacturer can optimize performance to specific camera

settings, features and issues.

Simplicity to setup: No need to install analytic software or new hardware.

Simplicity to troubleshoot/service: Since a single vendor is behind this, easier

to get clear answers about what is wrong.

Flexible to add cameras to existing VMS systems.

What is bad about it?

Limited to a handful of companies that offer this.

Cannot re-use existing 'regular' cameras.

A few major manufacturers call their embedded motion detection "analytics"

which is misleading and should be avoided.

What companies are examples of this? For real video analytics embedded in cameras -

ioimage/DVTel, Sightlogix and VideoIQ. For motion detection marketed as video

analytics - Sony and Samsung among others.

© IPVM.com 45 of 95

Rating Video Analytic Architectures

Given the weak state of video analytics today, priority number 1 for most applications

is reliable performance. One cannot take for granted that video analytics works. A

prudent user would be better off assuming that most do not work well enough for

production use.

Our ratings, therefore, weigh performance as the defining factor. With that noted,

here is our rating:

1. Embedded camera analytics

2. Add on camera analytics

3. Embedded DVR/NVR/VMS analytics

4. Server based analytics

Bottom line, the more deeply embedded the analytics are within the camera, the

more likely that the analytics work well and will be easier to setup. Server based add

on analytics are almost always the worst choice, likely requiring a lot more money and

increasing inaccuracy risks.

© IPVM.com 46 of 95

Bandwidth Basics for Video Surveillance

When using IP cameras and video management systems, understanding the basics

about bandwidth availability and demands is critical to planning, designing and

deploying systems. Everyone in the industry should have an understanding of the

basics as bandwidth is a critical factor in video surveillance

How Much Bandwidth is Available?

To determine bandwidth availability, you first need to determine what locations you

are communicating between. Much like driving, you will have a starting point and

destination, for example, from your branch office to your headquarters. However,

unlike driving, the amount of bandwidth available can range dramatically depending

on where you are going.

The most important factor in determining how much bandwidth is available is

whether or not you need connectivity between two different buildings. For instance:

In the Same Building - Lots of Bandwidth: 70Mb/s to 700 Mb/s of bandwidth is

generally available

Between Different Buildings - Scarce Bandwidth: .5 Mb/s to 5 Mb/s of

bandwidth is generally available

The amount of bandwidth available going from your office to a co-worker's office in

the same building can be 200 times more than the bandwidth from your office to a

© IPVM.com 47 of 95

branch office down the block.

This is true in 90% or more cases. Note the following exceptions:

If these are different buildings but on the same campus, more bandwidth may

be available.

If you are in a central business district of a major city, more bandwidth may be

available.

If you are a telecommunications or research company, more bandwidth may be

available.

Different Buildings

The key driver in bandwidth availability is the cost increase of deploying networks

between buildings. Generally referred to as the Wide Area Network or WAN, this type

of bandwidth is usually provided by telecommunications companies. One common

example is cable modem or DSL, which can provide anywhere from .5 Mb/s to 5 Mb/s

at $20 to $50 per month. Another example is a T1, which provides 1.5Mb/s for about

$300 to $600 per month. Above this level, bandwidth generally becomes very

expensive. In most locations, getting 10Mb/s of bandwidth can cost thousands per

month.

Many talk about fiber (sometimes called FTTH/FTTC) but fiber to the building is not

and will not be widely available for years. Fiber to the home or to the business

promises to reduce the cost of bandwidth significantly. Nevertheless, it is very

expensive to deploy and despite excited discussions for the last decade or more,

progress remains slow. If you have it great, but do not assume it.

© IPVM.com 48 of 95

Same Buildings

By contrast, bandwidth inside of buildings (or campuses) is quite plentiful because the

install costs are quite low. Non-technical users can easily set up a 1,000Mb/s networks

inside a building (aka Local Area Networks or LANs) for less than $1,000 installation

cost with no monthly costs. Contrast this to the WAN, where the same bandwidth

could cost tens of thousands of dollars per month.

The cost of deploying networks in buildings are low because there are minimal to no

construction expenses. When you are building a network across a city, you need to

get rights of ways, trench, and install on telephone poles, etc. These are massive

projects that can easily demand millions or billions of dollars in up front expenses. By

contrast, inside a building, the cables can often by quickly and simply fished through

ceilings (not the professional way to do it but the way many people do it in

deployments).

Wireless

A lot of discussion about wireless (WiMax, WiFi, 3G, etc.) exists but wireless will not

provide significantly greater bandwidth nor significantly better costs than DSL or cable

modem. As such, wireless will not solve the expense and limitations of bandwidth

between buildings. That being said, wireless absolutely has benefits for mobility

purposes and connecting to remote locations that DSL or cable modem cannot cost

effectively serve.

Simple point to point wireless links have become inexpensive but are limited in where

© IPVM.com 49 of 95

they can be used. Today, 50-100Mb/s wireless connections for a few hundred dollars

are feasible (excluding installation). However, these only can be used when clear line

of sight is available. This helps when you want to locate a camera 100 meters away in

a parking lot but not if you want to transmit across a city.

How Much Bandwidth Do IP Cameras Consume?

For the bandwidth consumption of an IP camera, use 1-2 Mb/s as a rough rule of

thumb. Many factors impact total bandwidth consumption. You can certainly stream

an IP camera as low as .2 Mb/s (or 200 Kb/s) and others as high as 6 Mb/s. In 2012,

the most typical IP camera being deployed are HD (720p or 1080p) using the H.264

codec at about 6-10 fps. With this configuration, bandwidth consumption will be in

the range of 1-2 Mb/s. Of course, the more resolution and greater frame rate you

want, the more bandwidth will be used.

What Does this Mean for my IP Video System?

Just like dealing with personal finance, we can now figure out what we can 'afford':

Between Buildings: We have .5 Mb/s to 5 Mb/s to 'spend'

Inside Buildings: We have 70 Mb/s to 700 Mb/s to 'spend'

IP cameras: Cost us 1-2 Mb/s each

Using these points, we can quickly see what combination of IP and megapixel cameras

we can use between buildings or inside of buildings.

Inside of buildings, it is easy to stream numerous IP and megapixel cameras.

Between buildings, it is almost impossible to stream numerous IP and

© IPVM.com 50 of 95

megapixel cameras.

Because of this situation, the standard configuration one sees in IP Video systems is:

A local recorder at each building/remote site. The local recorder receives the

streams from the building and stores them.

The local recorder only forwards the streams (live or recorded) off-site when a

user specifically wants to view video. Rather than overloading the WAN network

with unrealistic bandwidth demands all day long, bandwidth is only consumed

when a user wants to watch. Generally, remote viewing is sporadic and IP video

coexists nicely with the expensive Wide Area Network.

The local recorder has built-in features to reduce the bandwidth needed to

stream video to remote clients. Most systems have the ability to reduce the frame

rate of the live video stream or to dynamically reduce the video quality to ensure

that the video system does not overload the network and that remote viewers can

actually see what is going on the other side. Generally, the live video stream is

sufficient to identify the basic threat. In any event, bandwidth is generally so

costly, especially the upstream bandwidth needed to send to a remote viewer, that

this is the best financial decision.

© IPVM.com 51 of 95

Integrating 3rd

Party Systems / APIs

APIs are not commonly discussed but they are the hidden key to integrating 3rd party

systems like video, access control, intrusion and PSIM. While APIs can provide great

benefits, using them is much more complex than often mentioned in sales calls and

magazines.

The goal of APIs in physical security is to allow different applications to work together.

Examples include:

Integrating your DVR/NVR with your access control system

Integrating your alarm system with a central monitoring system

Integrating your IP cameras or analytics with your NVR

Building a PSIM system that integrates with all your security systems

You most commonly hear APIs discussed in pre-sales situations where a customer or

integrator asks a vendor: "Does your system work with 'X'?" where X could be any

number of security systems by any number of manufacturers.

The routine answer by the sales person is:

"Sure, we have an API."

For as long as I have been in security I have been hearing this response.

This is the most dangerous and misleading statement in all of physical security.

Because it is so common and so dangerous, it is a great place to start reviewing APIs.

Lesson #1: No such thing as 'an' API

© IPVM.com 52 of 95

There is no such thing as 'an' API. Numerous APIs exist. In larger systems, hundreds of

APIs exist. Generally, there is an API for each function in a system. Want to watch live

video, use the live video API. Want to change the time, use the time change API. Want

to increase the frame rate for recording, use the recording frame rate API, etc.

Lesson #2: Not all Functions have an API

Here's the first gotcha. Not all functions have an API available. Let's say you need to

get a list of all health alerts from another application. This application may have 'an

API' but not a specific API for sending health alerts. As you can imagine because most

systems today have hundreds of functions, it is common that dozens of these

functions are not accessible via an API.

Lesson #3: Having an API does not mean it will work with your system

Let's say you have Genetec for your NVR and Software House for your access control.

Both of these companies certainly have APIs but there is no guarantee that these two

products will work together. Both companies having APIs is a pre-requisite for

integration but it is not sufficient. At least, both of these companies need to work

together to ensure the integration works reliably. Many companies certify their API

works with partners but frequently your product combination will not be included.

Lesson #4: Doing the Integration Takes Time

Vendors often claim a few weeks for integration. This can happen but often technical

details need to be worked out that can take significantly longer. Be careful in the time

and dollar amount you commit for such projects. This is the type of risk that is often

unknown and unknowable until you dig into the technical details about how each

vendor implements their APIs. Generally, these projects are ultimately successful, but

the time and cost can vary.

© IPVM.com 53 of 95

Lesson #5: API Changes can Break You

Just like a product, over time, APIs change. The difference is with APIs, their change

can break your system. Reasons for change include eliminating bugs, enhancing

performance, adding in new functionalities. Other system depends on those APIs.

Let's say your system works with "Vendor B" version 3.1. Now let's say "Vendor B"

comes out with 3.2 but this version "breaks the API". In other words, the new version

is not backward compatible with the old version. Your system could suddenly stop

working with "Vendor B" if you upgrade Vendor B to version 3.2. The result is your

security command center no longer displays video or access or whatever the system

that just got the upgrade.

Lesson #6: You are Stuck with what the API does

Unless you are a very large customer, you are stuck with whatever the API does in

whatever way it does it. Often, for what you need, this works out fine. However, if you

need some change for your specific use case, this can be hard to accomplish. Make

sure someone on your technical team knows specifically what the API can and cannot

do so you can anticipate any potential problems up front. If a change needs to be

made, the change will usually take a lot of time and testing. This occurs not because

people are slow but because the vendor must ensure that they do not break the

1000s of other security organizations using this API.

The use of APIs are certainly beneficial for physical security and their use will

undoubtedly grow. Understanding the realities of using APIs will ultimately help us

maximize our value of system integration.

© IPVM.com 54 of 95

Surveillance's Shift to IP

Over the past decade, people argued when the surveillance industry would shift from

analog to IP cameras. This shift has now occurred and for those looking for new

systems in economically developed countries, the clear choice is now IP. Here's why.

Already Tipped Right Under Our Noses

In 2011, the market has already tipped to IP cameras in the most relevant and

important metric to integrators and end users - new project deployments in the most

developed countries. This report will explain what is happening, why it is happening

and why this tip is so important to today's video surveillance decisions.

The Surveillance System Sales Cycle

To appreciate why the 'real' tip has already occurred, we need to understand the sales

cycle of surveillance systems. Most importantly, one needs to appreciate the role

system compatibility has in shaping sales now and in the future.

Surveillance systems - combinations of recorders, cameras, monitors, etc. - are

deployed and used over many years (typically 5 - 10) before wholesale replacements

are done. The original architecture selected at the beginning of the cycle shapes what

is purchased for nearly a decade.

Even up to a few years ago, 95%+ of new systems were based on a classic DVR

architecture. Classic DVRs are only compatible with analog cameras - not USB

cameras, not HDcctv cameras and not IP cameras. Once you selected a classic DVR, all

© IPVM.com 55 of 95

you could use, without major structural changes, was analog cameras. As such, almost

everyone only used analog cameras.

Often, critics of IP cameras would point to much higher sales of analog over IP and

draw a conclusion that users were essentially 'voting' for analog cameras. In reality,

users were 'voting' first and foremost for compatibility with their sizable existing

investment into analog only DVRs.

Segmenting Surveillance Camera Sales

To recognize trends, it is important to break down surveillance camera sales into 2

distinct groups - (1) Extension Sales and (2) New Project sales.

Extension sales include:

Multi-year roll-out of a large scale surveillance systems across sites

Adding facilities for a user with an existing surveillance system

Replacing broken equipment

New project sales have 2 types:

Greenfield deployments where a user has no video surveillance (e.g., new

construction)

Major System Swap out - every 5-10 years, users will decide their architecture

is simply too old and out of date and will look for a completely new platform

Today's Surveillance Camera Sales

Unsurprisingly, analog heavily outsells IP for extension sales. In these cases, the

architecture (heavily analog) is already in place and the user simply gets more of the

© IPVM.com 56 of 95

same (i.e., analog).

However, in the last year, for new projects in the US and Europe, it has become clear

that IP camera sales are outpacing analog sales. Among enterprise projects, IP's

predominance is almost shocking with more than 75% of new projects going with IP.

[For background, see our IP Camera Sales report.]

Various independent evidence points to this critical shift in new project sales. We see

this in surveys of integrators, in reviews of RFPs and in discussions with both

incumbent analog and newer entrant IP providers.

Why New Project Sales are Key

Once a surveillance technology dominates new project sales, the rest of the market is

a foregone conclusion. Just like users with analog only DVRs spent years buying more

analog cameras, today's new projects deploying software only VMS systems will focus

their extension purchases on IP cameras over the rest of the decade. This has a

compounding or snowballing effect. The more people choose IP for new projects, the

less analog platforms are in place, the lower both new and extension sales are for

analog.

Why Have New Projects Tipped to IP?

New projects are tipping to IP now because IP cameras have made dramatic progress

in the past 3 years. Remember, in 2008, the market had:

Less than 10 megapixel camera manufacturers total

A real debate if H.264 megapixel would actually work

© IPVM.com 57 of 95

Very limited form factors for megapixel

Expensive pricing for megapixel cameras (typically $700+)

Today, just 3 years later,

Nearly 100 manufacturers are offering Megapixel IP

H.264 Megapixel is ubiquitous

Various form factors, size and product options are available for megapixel IP

$300 - $500 pricing for MP IP is common

H.264 megapixel cameras tipped the market to IP. The advantages over analog were

obvious and compelling. This was certainly not the only advantage that IP cameras /

VMS software offered but was the most powerful and recent one. As we examined in

a report, justifying megapixel vs. SD has become fairly easy.

The Many Definitions of Tipping

We focus on new project sales since this has the most practical impact on real world

decisions. However, there is no absolute 'right' metric for defining a market's tipping.

For example, if the metric selected was the year when more cameras deployed in the

field were IP than analog, the tipping point might not be until 2020 or 2025 as it will

take years to cycle out all the existing legacy analog cameras. You could then argue

that IP will not be a significant force for more than a decade. However, that would be

ridiculous as it completely misses the shift in new buying and selling decisions.

Has the Market Tipped To IP Cameras? Reader Poll Results

© IPVM.com 58 of 95

Yes 89.72%

No 10.28%

© IPVM.com 59 of 95

Statistics: What is Actually Being Used

IPVM provides the world's most sophisticated and in depth statistical analysis of what

is actually being used in real world deployments. We regularly survey integrators

around the globe to understand current trends. Here are statistics on some key

practical choices.

Average Cameras Deployed Per Site

The average number of cameras deployed per site was approximately 20. Here's the

breakdown:

MP IP vs. SD IP Cameras

One of the biggest shifts in the industry right now is the move from SD IP to MP IP

cameras, as shown by the statistics below:

Full results and commentary can be found in: MP vs. SD Cameras Comparison.

© IPVM.com 60 of 95

VMS Hardware Usage Statistics

While a clear majority prefer using COTS hardware for VMS software, a notable 1/3rd

preferred appliances:

Full results and commentary can be found at: VMS / NVR Hardware Usage Statistics

Examined.

IP Video Network Deployment

In one of the most hotly debated and controversial results, overwhelmingly

integrators said they use dedicated networks for IP video surveillance:

What made this so controversial was the belief / hope of 'converged' networks. The

reality is that a lot of problems, mostly organizational, are blocking this. See the full

results.

Recording Mode

With motion based recording you can miss critical evidence. Nonetheless, the clear

majority of integrators most often use this:

© IPVM.com 61 of 95

For more on the plus and minuses of each recording mode, read the full review.

Frame Rate Used

The average frame rate used for recording is approximately 6 - 10 fps, far lower than

the 'max' frame rate available in most cameras:

Full results and commentary can be found at: Average Frame Rate Statistics

© IPVM.com 62 of 95

Examined.

© IPVM.com 63 of 95

Top 10 Surveillance Myths Exposed

Manufacturers spread many misleading myths. From trade shows to magazines to

'whitepapers', manufacturers manipulate their sales spin into 'edumarketing'

materials. In this chapter, we examine 10 of the most serious myths facing the video

surveillance industry. Our analysis is based on the systematic results of our testing

program that disproved these claims.

Here are the 10:

Myth: Resolution Comparison Diagram

Myth: More Pixels = Higher Image Quality

Myth: A Megapixel Camera is Equal to Many SD Cameras

Myth: Pixels Per Foot is a Reliable metric

Myth: WDR Camera Specifications are Legitimate

Myth: Minimum Illumination Specifications are Legitimate

Myth: Superior Low Light Performance Claims

Myth: IR Illuminators Massively Reduce Bandwidth Consumption

Myth: VSaaS is Secure and Mature

Myth: 80% Analytics are Good Enough

Myth: Megapixel 'Virtually Eliminates' PTZ Cameras

Most of you have seen megapixel comparison charts where overlayed boxes show

how much higher resolution cameras can capture than lower resolution ones.

Here's an example:

© IPVM.com 64 of 95

While the layout varies by vendor, this is an industry wide technique.

These resolution comparison charts are dangerously misleading because they imply

that all pixels are equal.

Here' an analogy. Let's say I claimed:

A 600 pound man can lift twice as much as a 300 pound man.

The assumption is clear as it is wrong. While more weight often correlates with more

strength, this is far from universal.

More weight does not guarantee more power. More pixels does NOT guarantee

more details. Period.

This flawed assumption is the basis of a number of other myths and might be the

most serious issue our industry faces as we attempt to properly integrate megapixel

surveillance.

© IPVM.com 65 of 95

Myth: More pixels = Higher Image Quality

While more pixels often delivers higher image quality, it does not always. Here are the

3 bounding factors to keep in mind:

Light Variations: Glare and shadows can significantly reduce or eliminate the

benefits of higher resolution. In real world video surveillance, it is very hard to

overcome glare and shadow throughout the day (this is not a photo shoot where

you can control lighting for a few hours and then leave). If the camera can see

sunlight, windows or streetlights, be prepared for significant reductions in image

quality for megapixel cameras.

Low Light: Even if you have street lighting, at night, megapixel cameras will

perform only marginally better or equal to SD cameras. This is because of low light

sensitivity restrictions and the impact of aggressive gain levels that increases

noise. See our SD vs. HD night shootout for proof and examples.

Target Location: Even if a higher resolution camera can provide more details,

often those details do not matter. For instance, once a person is far enough from a

camera, a higher and lower resolution camera (even in ideal lighting conditions)

will both show blobs. The higher resolution camera's blob may be bigger but the

practical difference will be meaningless.

Megapixel cameras can provide higher image quality. However, it is imperative to

factor in from the start (1) what lighting variations a scene faces, (2) if the scene will

be dark at any time and (3) what practical differences the cameras will make in your

scene.

While it is simple to say more pixels = higher image quality, it is bound to deliver

© IPVM.com 66 of 95

underwhelming results and disappointed users.

Myth: A Megapixel Camera is Equal to Many SD Cameras (4, 9, 12, 27, 81, etc.)

Based on the reasons laid out above, this myth is clearly false. Megapixel tends to be

better but claiming that it is 4x or 10x better has no grounds in reality. We examined

this myth in detail in our debunking of an Arecont Rep's megapixel 'calculator'.

Myth: Pixels Per Foot is a Reliable metric

The goal of pixels per foot is to provide a standard metric that can be used across

cameras to guarantee image quality specifications are met. Theoretically, if a specifier

states that 40 pixels per foot are needed, they can be assured whatever camera

manufacturer, model or resolution is used, the image quality needs will be met. While

a noble attempt, this is fundamentally flawed.

Pixels per foot (or per meter) only works based on the assumption that all pixels

provide equivalent image quality. That is false and it kills the metric.

See our 'Specifying Video Surveillance Quality' Report for our full recommendations

on how to use Pixel per Foot metrics and avoid the dangerous consequences of this

myth.

Myth: WDR Camera Specifications

While Wide Dynamic Range (WDR) functionality is a very important function to

overcome lighting variations, WDR specifications are unreliable.

© IPVM.com 67 of 95

It is easy for any manufacturer to identify their product as WDR. No standards,

no third party testing, nothing. It is simply a marketing choice by the manufacturer.

The most common quantitative specification is using dBs to identify range (e.g.,

59 dB, 121 dB, etc.). These numbers are incomparable across models rendering

them useless.

In our tests, including a focused WDR study, an absolute difference clearly exists in

camera's WDR performance that makes a material impact on image details captured.

Here is an example of two professional cameras with the same resolution. Notice how

much better one handles sunlight than the other. This is purely a function of WDR:

However, no easy way exists to determine this based on WDR specifications claim.

Either keep track of our ongoing WDR tests or test yourself.

Myth: Minimum Illumination Specifications

© IPVM.com 68 of 95

Most experienced surveillance professionals know this: Minimum illumination

specifications can NOT be trusted. Really, just throw these numbers out the window.

Numbers are incomparable amongst manufacturers: Just because

Manufacturer A says their camera has .01 lux and Manufacturer B says their

camera has .1 lux means absolutely nothing.

Standards and assumptions used are different: Manufacturers vary in settings

used for exposure, gain, etc. Equally important, what is considered minimally

acceptable image quality varies.

Image Quality is Generally Terrible: While manufacturers almost never release

the resulting image in their minimum illumination specification, from our

discussion with insiders, these images tend to be grainy, dark and deliver not much

more than an outline of the scene - a far cry from the quality expected by most

users.

Despite this, RFPs continue to base product selection on these self-reported

specifications (e.g., camera must have a minimum illumination of .00001 lux).

Because of this, and in fairness to manufacturers, it is a stupid game they all have to

play. If one company was 'honest', they would lose a lot of deals.

Review our 'Surveillance Camera RFP Specification Template' for guidance on how to

properly overcome these issues with WDR and minimum illumination specifications.

Myth: Superior Low Light Performance Claims

We often hear integrators, even experience ones, talk about certain manufacturers

© IPVM.com 69 of 95

having the 'best' low light performance. Almost universally the manufacturer they

praise is one who defaults to using a digital slow shutter.

Shutters control how much light a camera capture. A 'standard' shutter in surveillance

is typically 1/30s. However, if you open the shutter longer, you capture more light. For

example, a camera with a 1/6s maximum exposure (like most Axis cameras) take in 5

times the amount of light as one that uses a more 'standard' 1/30s.

Essentially, every IP camera allows for slow shutter speeds. The only difference is

what defaults different manufacturers choose. Here's an example of defaults from our

testing: Arecont 1/12.5s, Avigilon H.264, 1/30s, Axis 1/6s, Basler 1/8s, Bosch 1/7s, Pelco

1/8.3, Sony 1/30s. Indeed, over the last few years, we have noticed the trend of

megapixel cameras defaulting to slower shutter speeds.

Differences in default shutter speeds make massive differences in the brightness of

the image and the perception of the user. Without a doubt, cameras with slower

default shutter speeds are viewed as superior to those with faster ones - even though

there is no fundamental technological differences.

While we certainly believe some differences in low light performance exist, be very

careful that you are not being tricked into favoring a camera simply because of more

aggressive shutter speed settings.

For more, see our review on 'How Exposure Impacts Video Surveillance' and 'Why

Exposure Settings Need to be Standardized'.

Myth: IR Illuminators Massively Reduce Bandwidth Consumption

© IPVM.com 70 of 95

Understandably, IR illuminator vendors want to sell more IR illuminators and

bandwidth consumption does tend to spike at night (at least for certain cameras).

However, there are a number of problems facing this claim:

Not all cameras even face this issue: Any camera that uses constant bit rate

encoding or sets a maximum bit rate (ceiling) can avoid such spikes.

Cameras impacted differently: Cameras using variable bit rate (VBR)encoding

can see spikes but the level of spikes is significantly impacted by the gain settings

of the camera. Higher level of gain create noise which increases bandwidth

consumption in cameras using VBR. The specific level depends on the vendor. Also,

users can and should set gain limits on cameras to reduce this issue. Often high

level of gains provide no quality improvements but significant bandwidth

consumption.

IR illumination coverage needs to be strong and wide across the entire scene to

deliver massive bandwidth reductions. This works best in a lab where you point an

illuminator against a wall. Unfortunately, most IR illuminators are used outdoors in

wide environments.

For more, view our IR illuminator test results and our debunking of Raytec's IR savings

claims.

Myth: VSaaS is Secure and Mature

Unlike the other myths in this report, this one is only promulgated by a single vendor -

albeit the most powerful surveillance manufacturer in the world.

While VSaaS has potential, the limitations are significant:

© IPVM.com 71 of 95

Maturity: VSaaS software sophistication can hardly compete with low end

DVRs. VSaaS user interfaces and functionalities tend to be extremely rudimentary

compared. This will certainly change but in 2011, it is not close. VSaaS users would

have to give up many of their existing benefits - advanced search capabilities, 3rd

party system integration, IP camera support, etc.

Security: The security risks of VSaaS are much more significant than traditional

surveillance while the security maturity of the VSaaS providers are quite low. With

VSaaS, video is now being transmitted (almost always) across the public Internet

and hosted by outside provider, exposing users to 2 new risks. While VSaaS

vendors like to talk about the security/maturity record of cloud computing

providers (which has issues itself), almost all of the VSaaS providers are small

operations with limited track records and minimal evidence to prove their security.

We understand that convincing users that VSaaS is secure and mature is key to

adoption but it's just not there. The maturity is nearly self-evident but the false claims

to security are a ticking time bomb.

We broke down these claims and our concerns in our Axis VSaaS Myths - Issues and

Inaccuracies.

Myth: 80% Analytics is Good Enough

While analytic vendors have retreated from their wildly bullish claims, the new claim

is that even if analytics are not perfect, they can be good enough. The pitch goes, "If

my analytics can get 80% of the bad guys, that's 80% more than what you are getting

today. Sure we may miss some but you are not identifying anyone today."

For most security purposes, this is a dangerous approach that fails to deliver in

© IPVM.com 72 of 95

practice:

Analytics has never had a problem alerting on 'true' suspects. It's fairly easy to

alert against a person crossing your fence or smashing in your window. That 80%

number is certainly achievable.

The problem remains the number of false alerts triggered by wind, rain, leaves,

small animals, sunlight, shadows, etc. This tends to happen a lot with '80% analytic

systems. Operators can then be responding to dozens or hundreds of false alerts

every day. In our experience, this is the number 1 reason why analytic systems get

shut down.

'Boy Who Cried Wolf': When faced with so many false alarms relative to valid

alerts, operators tend to give up. If you have 100 false alerts to every valid one,

motivation declines significantly. Academic research shows that.

Imagine trying real time facial recognition across every Wal-Mart. Even if the system

was 80% accurate in identifying me, the number of times it would falsely alert again

people who look like me is astronomical (given the hundreds of thousands of

Wal-Mart shoppers daily and variances in lighting, camera positioning, etc.).

Can analytics be 80% accurate? Absolutely. Can it scale and meet the operational

requirements of large organizations? Highly, highly unlikely.

Myth: Megapixel 'Virtually Eliminates' PTZ Cameras

False and not close. The optical zoom capabilities of PTZ cameras provides far more

coverage area than even the very best megapixel camera.

Here is an example of an SD PTZ optically zoomed in vs. a 20MP camera digitally

zoomed in:

© IPVM.com 73 of 95

It is not even close - the MP camera cannot deliver anywhere near the level of details

of the optical zoom of a PTZ.

We debunk this in great detail and with images from our test results in our

'Debunking of PTZ Elimination Claims.'

© IPVM.com 74 of 95

Surveillance Video in Action

When surveillance video 'works' it tells a clear, compelling story of what actually

happened that is crucial to prosecuting crimes. This real world case study is an

excellent example of surveillance that works.

In the beginning of the event, an outdoor camera aimed perpendicular to the

entrance catches a women running into the store to evade a car:

As the woman runs inside, we switch to the front door surveillance camera that

captures the car crashing through and the manager getting speared by the vehicle:

© IPVM.com 75 of 95

Here's an alternative angle captured by an overview camera behind the cash register

showing the car crashing through.

A different view is captured by a 4th camera on the left side of the store showing a

person running away as the car crashes.

© IPVM.com 76 of 95

A 5th camera on the opposing left side provides an alternate view of the crash:

Now, we pick up the footage outside where a 6th camera picks up the original driver

stealing a car outside and driving away.

© IPVM.com 77 of 95

Finally, moments later, that 6th camera catches the stolen vehicle in a head on

collision with a delivery truck.

Undoubtedly, the footage is amazing, telling a compelling story of what happened.

Having cameras in key positions allows multiple angles that comprehensively captures

incidents.

© IPVM.com 78 of 95

Improving Real World Surveillance Video

Many surveillance systems suffer from common problems. Here we examine those

problems including poor positioning, too wide coverage areas and steep downtilts.

Learn from these mistakes so you can avoid those problems in your systems.

Los Angeles was hit by an arsonist who lit dozens of cars on fire around the city.

Needless to say, this created a panic around the area as people feared their

neighborhood and or cars would be victimized. At one point, the police found a

suspect on surveillance video but the image was nowhere near good enough to

conclusively identify the person of interest.

Let's take a look at what the problems were and how one could improve upon the

situation. Let's start with an overview of the scene and the suspect in the middle of

the image (black jacket, hands in pockets):

© IPVM.com 79 of 95

A fundamental element of all surveillance video is the Horizontal Field of View.

Looking at the man and assuming he is ~2 feet wide at the shoulders, the Horizontal

FoV at the point is between 20 - 25 feet. In our experience, this is a fairly average

width. The marked up image below illustrates this:

When assessing image quality and a camera's Field of View, pixels per foot is an often

used metric. Assuming this is an analog camera recording at VGA (640 x 480), the ppf

at that point in the scene is about 25-32 pixels per foot (i.e., 640 pixels / 20 feet - 640

pixels / 25 feet). That's a modest level all things considered that 'theoretically' should

give some facial details. [For background on pixels per foot, review our PPF test report

and specifying video quality / PPF guide.]

This noted, the video quality is obviously 'bad' and it's not feasible to make out any

facial details. However, this is not a case of the light levels being too low. We regularly

measure lux levels in similar public places at night and typically find such areas to

© IPVM.com 80 of 95

have 3 - 5 lux - more than enough to capture a reasonably quality image.

In the image below, we marked up our estimates of the light levels in the scene:

The first big problem we see in the image is the wide variance in lighting between the

right center of the image with the streetlight glare and the darker left side. This 7x

variance in lighting is a big problem. While most think of WDR as a daytime issue -

bright sun through windows or doors, one can have severe WDR problems at night.

Indeed, as we examined in our headlights harmful test results, headlights at night are

a great example of this problem.

Look at the zoomed in image below and you can see that the subject's face is

completely washed out. You only see this with a WDR problem, not simply if the FoV

was too wide:

© IPVM.com 81 of 95

Compounding the glare/WDR issue is the downtilt of the camera. Take a look below at

the last image of the suspect at the bottom of the screen in the narrowest FoV. The

facial image is still almost completely washed out plus you can see how sharp a

downtilt the camera has toward the subject.

© IPVM.com 82 of 95

This camera is likely mounted 15 to 20 feet from ground level. This is a secondary

problem to WDR/glare but it further reduces the ability to capture a clear image.

Steps for Improvement

With these issues in mind, we recommend the following improvements:

Higher resolution: With this current FoV, a 720p or 1080p camera would

provide a notable and useful increase in pixel density.

Day/Night camera: Given the ambient light levels, a super low light camera is

not needed. As long as the camera has a mechanical cut filter (i.e. a true D/N

camera), this should be sufficient.

Superior WDR: Given the glare from the streetlamp and the variances in

lighting in the scene, a true WDR camera should be used (see our MP WDR

shootout results).

Camera Mounting: To get the most direct angle to subject's faces, the camera

should be mounted between lower (even 10-12 feet would provide a notable

improvement).

© IPVM.com 83 of 95

FBI CCTV Best Practices Reviewed

The United States FBI provides a CCTV Best Practices guide in a unique form of a TV

show episode. In this post, we review the FBI's recommendations, providing

feedback and commentary on what is realistic and what can best be done to

improve commercial surveillance systems.

In the rest of this chapter, we analyze 13 key recommendations made by the FBI,

providing our input.

WDR

One of the first things the FBI notes is the common problem of washed out images

at entrance doors. The snapshot below from the FBI video demonstrates this:

The category of camera that addresses this problem is called WDR or Wide

Dynamic Range. WDR is definitely a valuable feature to use especially for outdoor

entrances.

Making the best use of WDR can be challenging. Keep these pointers in mind:

Expect to pay a premium: Cameras with WDR tend to be $100 - $250 USD

© IPVM.com 84 of 95

more than cameras that do not.

Beware of marketing claims: Any vendor can claim their cameras have WDR and many do even when the performance benefits are minimal or nonexistent.

MP cameras have the best WDR: If you want the strongest WDR, our tests show that top MP cameras significantly outperform their top SD counterparts.

Stay Up to Date: Our ongoing testing series has a MP WDR shootout as well as comparisons of new cameras claiming WDR - Pelco SureVision and Axis Q1604.

Obscuring Cameras

Next, the FBI comments on problems with cameras being obscured, demonstrated

in the clip below of a marketing sign blocking out a suspect's face.

From time to time this does happen. Typically, no obstructions exist when the

system is first installed. At that time, the security manager usually reviews and

adjusts camera angles and signs to eliminate this problem. However, later on, new

signs or furnishings may be installed. For instance, Christmas decorations can be an

issue. Often the employees setting this up have no knowledge of nor awareness of

the impact on the surveillance system.

The best way to minimize obstructions is to:

Train the people who watch the surveillance system to take note and make an issue of any obstructions.

© IPVM.com 85 of 95

Have an integrator / service company conduct periodic maintenance.

Out of Focus Cameras

Another problem the FBI raises is cameras being out of focused as demonstrated in

the screencap below:

This can happen from time to time. Two common steps are taken to mitigate this:

Periodic maintenance - A technician will come on site every 3 to 6 months, check the focus and refocus each camera as needed. See our support / maintenance guide for recommendations.

Auto back focus - A feature available on many new cameras allows for automatic re-focusing to eliminate this problem. Auto back focus (also called ABF) is increasingly popular. Even mid-tier cameras now have this as a feature. Pay attention to cameras with ABF and prefer them if everything else is close.

Webcams

The FBI says that webcams provide low quality video.

© IPVM.com 86 of 95

While that may be the reputation of webcams from many years ago, webcams

actually offer excellent resolution at very low cost. For years, HD webcams under

$100 have been commonplace. Indeed in our webcam test, they did surprisingly

well with the biggest constraints being video processing and cable lengths.

Webcams do not scale well but are actually a very economical choice for low

budget applications just needing a camera or two.

Resolution

The FBI notes the importance of resolution:

This example, though misleading, highlights the importance of both resolution and

handling adverse lighting. For instance, the lower resolution shot on the right

clearly suffers from a WDR / backlight issue. Sometimes, a scene needs more

resolution but other times it is a lighting issue. Now, in 2012, the sweet spot for

overall image quality is HD (720p or 1080p) from professional cameras. Lower

© IPVM.com 87 of 95

resolution cameras, even with WDR, will not match. However, higher resolution

cameras (3MP, 5MP, etc.) will almost always have major low light performance

problems.

Depth of Field

The FBI advocates maximizing the depth of field and to this end they recommend

lower F stops. The screencap below demonstrates the recommendation.

We disagree on this recommendation entirely:

In photography, maximizing depth of fields requires higher F stops. This has a horrible side effect in surveillance - terrible low light images - as higher F stops restrict light input. As such, doing this is not practical.

Depth of field even with low F stops is rarely a practical problem. The big issue typically is lack of resolution / image detail farther away from the camera but that is better handled through higher resolution rather than lens adjustments.

Width of FoV

The FBI cites the age old "15% rule" for capturing detailed facial shots of subjects:

© IPVM.com 88 of 95

This is well intentioned but it suffers from two major flaws:

Too Tight: To meet the 15% rule, the total FoV width has to be 5-6 feet. This is way too tight to provide coverage of most facilities. By contrast, the average FoV width is closer to 15-20 feet. While this is often too wide to capture facial details, it is often necessary for cost effectively deploying systems.

Megapixel Changes: Now with megapixel, you can have faces take up a much smaller percentage of a scene and still capture facial details. For instance, keeping the average 15-20 foot wide FoV and upgrading to 720p HD will likely deliver both a wide coverage area and facial details.

Camera Layout

The FBI recommends over 20 cameras to cover the interior of a convenience store

as shown by the yellow icons below:

© IPVM.com 89 of 95

The big challenge here is the cost. Typically, in a facility this size, we would expect

to see about half the number of cameras the FBI recommends (8-10 in the

interior). Doubling the number of cameras would be hard to justify.

Overlapping Coverage

As the FBI shows in the screencap below, the reason they recommend so many

cameras is to have completely overlapping camera coverage with no dead spots:

While this is an ambitious and noble goal, the problem remains the cost. Almost

no commercial facilities achieve this level of overlap due to it being cost

prohibitive. Typically, half the number of cameras is 'good enough'.

Offsetting Lights

The FBI points out again that lighting issues can cause problems identifying

subjects as demonstrated in this screencap:

© IPVM.com 90 of 95

To handle that, they recommend installing artificial lights to offset sunlight. In the

screencap below, the FBI demonstrates adding lighting to the left side of the scene:

This is simply a bad idea. Adding offsetting lighting works in photography shoots

because a technician can adjust the lighting in real time to optimize the correct

balance. However, in surveillance this is not feasible. An offsetting light will

sometimes make the scene better but other times worse because the level of the

sun will vary throughout the day and because of weather conditions (clouds, rain,

etc.). The FBI's earlier recommendation of WDR cameras is a much better solution

to this problem.

Adding Shades

© IPVM.com 91 of 95

The FBI recommends adding in shades to cut down glare on surveillance video.

This can be useful but keep in mind a few practical issues:

These shades will also impact the overall ambiance and comfort of the business. Typically, this will be a net positive as usually people and cameras both dislike glare. Nonetheless, adding shades impacts the entire business and will need to be approved by owners / operational managers (outside of security).

Even if shades are installed, shades will need to be raised or lowered on a daily basis. It is important that someone adjusts the shades regularly.

Native File Format

The FBI offers a series of recommendations for sharing video with the authorities:

© IPVM.com 92 of 95

This is a complex and important topic. See our Guide to Sharing Surveillance Video

with the Police for detailed recommendations.

© IPVM.com 93 of 95

THANK YOU

For more information, contact:

IPVM.com

[email protected]

(646) 867-1965

© IPVM.com 94 of 95

World's Best Surveillance Information Become a PRO Member

For the world's best video surveillance information, become an IPVM

PRO Member

This book provides the basics. Our PRO Membership delivers advanced

information and recommendations can save you thousands of dollars by

helping you to avoid mistakes and find the best solution for your needs.

Our mission is to be the 'Consumer Reports' of video surveillance,

delivering independent, critical, timely information. We never sell products,

accept advertising, run sponsorships nor consult for manufacturers.

We have thousands of members from over 100 countries.

What Our Members Say About the Pro Service

Here are a selection of unsolicited comments posted by PRO Members:

• "This is exactly the kind of information that we need. Keep up the

good work!"

• "This one report alone is worth what I am paying for yearly dues for

Pro access."

• "You have done a phenomenal job of educating and demystifying."

• "I had a customer ask me for some recommendations on, of all

things, parking lot cameras! I was delighted to review your excellent

piece on the subject."

© IPVM.com 95 of 95

• "Beautiful piece of work."

• "Great Report! Stuff like this makes paying the membership fee

easy."

• On our Camera Finder, "The GREATEST tool I ever saw so far. The

only word is THANKS !"

• "Your work is unparalleled both in the types of data you are

collecting and the way you present it. This type of analysis is sorely

needed to take this industry to the next step."

• "What I love about these 'real world tests' is exactly that, your tests

are based on scenarios that we encounter daily, not some theoretical

bench test that “proves” their camera will capture identifiable images of

an intruder at 100 yards with the lens cap on"

• "You have done an excellent job and unfortunately for a lot of

manufacturers 'the truth hurts'."

Learn More about Becoming a Member

Go here to learn more about becoming a member.